Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 6:42 am



Reply to topic  [ 228 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 The Hills Have Eyes (2006) 

What grade would you give this film?
A 38%  38%  [ 18 ]
B 42%  42%  [ 20 ]
C 10%  10%  [ 5 ]
D 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
F 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
I don't plan on seeing this film 6%  6%  [ 3 ]
Total votes : 48

 The Hills Have Eyes (2006) 
Author Message
Extraordinary
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:56 am
Posts: 12119
Location: Adrift in L.A.
Post 
makeshift wrote:
I was seriously moved more by Doug's character and his transformation throughout the film than anything else in any film thus far this year. I teared up at the end of the trailer attack sequence when Doug is holding his slowly dying wife in his arms. It's a brutal, unflinching, and heartbreaking moment. Especially since we've spent the first fourty five minutes of the film getting to know and appreciate these people.


I actually teared up when he was comforting Kathleen Quinlan as she dies.


Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:11 pm
Profile
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 1:00 am
Posts: 6502
Post 
makeshift wrote:
Dkmuto wrote:

I don't deny that the director here tries to imbue the film with some political commentary, but to me, the audience for which the film aims with its excess of ridiculous violence is completely adverse to those who would be able to pick up on the commentary in the first place.


Strange you should say that, considering most of the people here giving it high marks discuss the political allegories in their reviews.

I find it funny when people talk down about horror movies fans like they are some sort of secondary human race that grunts when gore and sex is splattered across a screen. It's been my experiences that horror fans are among the brightest and most open minded film goers you're ever likely to meet, and I'm proud to call myself one.


I guess I should say that I wasn't directing "those who wouldn't be able to pick up on the commentary" towards you. Or probably anybody here who has a grasp on what the film was trying to do in terms of theme.

But you're lumping me in with those who "talk down" to horror fans. And that is not -- or at least not what I'm trying -- to do. I get why people might enjoy horror films and enjoy being grossed out or shocked by heavy gore, but like I said, when it's this graphic (and I should mention that the version I saw was the unrated one), coupled with weak thematic implications (that its target demographic -- mainly young -- aren't going to grasp) and a storyline that goes nowhere other than killing, killing, gross-looking people, desert, crying, killing... I no longer understand how this is a "thrill" to watch.


Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:43 pm
Profile WWW
Where will you be?

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 4:50 am
Posts: 11675
Post 
Dkmuto wrote:
makeshift wrote:
Dkmuto wrote:

I don't deny that the director here tries to imbue the film with some political commentary, but to me, the audience for which the film aims with its excess of ridiculous violence is completely adverse to those who would be able to pick up on the commentary in the first place.


Strange you should say that, considering most of the people here giving it high marks discuss the political allegories in their reviews.

I find it funny when people talk down about horror movies fans like they are some sort of secondary human race that grunts when gore and sex is splattered across a screen. It's been my experiences that horror fans are among the brightest and most open minded film goers you're ever likely to meet, and I'm proud to call myself one.


I guess I should say that I wasn't directing "those who wouldn't be able to pick up on the commentary" towards you. Or probably anybody here who has a grasp on what the film was trying to do in terms of theme.

But you're lumping me in with those who "talk down" to horror fans. And that is not -- or at least not what I'm trying -- to do. I get why people might enjoy horror films and enjoy being grossed out or shocked by heavy gore, but like I said, when it's this graphic (and I should mention that the version I saw was the unrated one), coupled with weak thematic implications (that its target demographic -- mainly young -- aren't going to grasp) and a storyline that goes nowhere other than killing, killing, gross-looking people, desert, crying, killing... I no longer understand how this is a "thrill" to watch.


I hear where you're coming from, and that's how I felt about House of 1000 Corpses. Like the film was just people getting killed in brutal ways, and the film had no redeeming values to make it worthwhile, I just felt like shit for all of those involved.

That said, I felt like the difference between that film (I still don't really like to call it that) and The Hills Have Eyes is that the latter actually managed to be very suspenful, thrilling, and all around well made. For a horror film that focuses on isolated surroundings and a slow burn build up, atmosphere is key. The Hills Have Eyes worked as well for me as it did because it was beautiful to look at, fleshed out the characters and actually made me care about what happened to them, and gradually piled on the tension and suspsense to a fever pitch when the first assault happens. I'll admit that I felt the film went somewhat downhill in the last with with it's bombastic score (it sounded like it was supposed to be for a Civil War movie) and anticlimatic ending. But I felt that it was still extremely effective at making at least half a dozen scenes some of the most intense and suspenseful I've seen in awhile.


Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:06 pm
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 21628
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post 
Dr. Lecter wrote:
makeshift wrote:
Dkmuto wrote:

I don't deny that the director here tries to imbue the film with some political commentary, but to me, the audience for which the film aims with its excess of ridiculous violence is completely adverse to those who would be able to pick up on the commentary in the first place.


Strange you should say that, considering most of the people here giving it high marks discuss the political allegories in their reviews.

I find it funny when people talk down about horror movies fans like they are some sort of secondary human race that grunts when gore and sex is splattered across a screen. It's been my experiences that horror fans are among the brightest and most open minded film goers you're ever likely to meet, and I'm proud to call myself one.


Yeah, you know, there is a reason why many great directors started out with horror. See Peter Jackson and Sam Raimi, but even Spielberg can be counted with Jaws.


Lets not forget that its the easiest genre to get started in, Low budget, doesnt need big cast, just a gimmick. Not to mention like 90% of the ones released make money. ;) Though I know what you mean though Lect. I agree Horror movie fans usually know the most about film.

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:44 pm
Profile
We had our time together
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:36 am
Posts: 13269
Location: Vienna
Post 
I finally saw it the second time today and it held up very well. Still my favorite movie this year.


Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:11 pm
Profile WWW
Sbil

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48626
Location: Arlington, VA
Post 
I was watching part of this on Cinemax a few days ago and had to turn it off after less than 10 minutes. It just made me feel sick to my stomach, honestly.


Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:44 pm
Profile
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 1:00 am
Posts: 6502
Post 
It is still, for me, by far, the worst film of 2006.


Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:53 pm
Profile WWW
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post 
Libs wrote:
I was watching part of this on Cinemax a few days ago and had to turn it off after less than 10 minutes. It just made me feel sick to my stomach, honestly.

Lucky you didn't write that at the beginning of this film's release -- many hear at WOKJ would've taken that as a rave review -- the film's producer's might've even been tempted to use it as a blurb in the print advertising...


Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:04 am
Profile
ef star star kay
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 7:45 pm
Posts: 3016
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Post 
I've seen this movie long time ago.. but never got a chance to grade it..

B+

best horror of the year


Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:59 am
Profile
loyalfromlondon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm
Posts: 19697
Location: ville-marie
Post 
A surprisingly powerful and emotionally investing horror film that's almost unbearable to watch at times, but remains suspenseful throughout. The story is the same old clichéd, illogical tale that's been used in horror flicks for years, with a few twists, but the characters are so well-developed that, when the inevitable slaughter begins, you feel incredibly sorry for the victims. Thus, certain scenes are very difficult to watch. For this reason, though, it is easy to identify with Aaron Stanford's lead character and his quest for revenge, and the last third of the movie is very satisfying, while remaining realistic. Still, there are some huge leaps of logic in the story, and - other than Stanford - none of the acting is that impressive. Overall, a memorable horror flick.

_________________
Magic Mike wrote:
zwackerm wrote:
If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes.


Same.


Algren wrote:
I don't think. I predict. ;)


Last edited by trixster on Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:24 am, edited 1 time in total.



Sun Feb 04, 2007 8:57 pm
Profile
Orphan

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 5:47 pm
Posts: 19747
Post 
Libs wrote:
I was watching part of this on Cinemax a few days ago and had to turn it off after less than 10 minutes. It just made me feel sick to my stomach, honestly.


Chicken ;)


Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:39 am
Profile
problem?

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:52 am
Posts: 15515
Location: Bait Shop
Post 
Goddamnwasthisonehilariousthread. :lol:

_________________
Image


Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:46 am
Profile
Sbil

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48626
Location: Arlington, VA
Post 
Joe wrote:
Libs wrote:
I was watching part of this on Cinemax a few days ago and had to turn it off after less than 10 minutes. It just made me feel sick to my stomach, honestly.


Chicken ;)


Maybe.

But seeing some poor woman get shot in the head as her baby is having a gun pointed at while her younger sister is watching after almost being raped is not my idea of a good time.


Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:16 pm
Profile
Jordan Mugen-Honda
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 9:53 am
Posts: 13400
Post 
Never wrote a review for this wow surprised I forgot.

Well I'll say one thing for director Aja he does build-up exceptionally well I must admit but when the gore and mutants start to fly your left with a pretty bog standard horror. I dunno next to a Neil Marshall movie this just feels like gore for the sake of gore, and even thou I love my blood and guts I prefer it stored inside a more compelling story structure then the standard one on display here.

B- (for the excellent build-up play and the odd glimpse of horror smarts)

_________________
Rosberg was reminded of the fuel regulations by his wheel's ceasing to turn. The hollow noise from the fuel tank and needle reading zero had failed to convay this message


Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:55 pm
Profile
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 1:00 am
Posts: 6502
Post 
I hate this movie with a fiery, fiery passion.

I'm totally pumped for the sequel, though!


Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:37 am
Profile WWW
Cream of the Crop

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 5:17 pm
Posts: 2716
Location: Berlin, Germania
Post Re: The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
makeshift was right when he claimed that the black christmas remake is better than this. i can understand how someone might mistake the slick visuals and not-terrible acting for decent filmmaking, but especially the ending with the random long haired mutant dude attacking the children - the ending to a subplot that adds nothing to the story, just another 10 wasted minutes - is just lazy garbage that has no reason at all to be in this film that relies wholly on cheap jump scares. its not nearly as unpleasant as it thinks it is and also one of the most subtext-free american guilt metaphors i've ever seen - for a far superior exploration of similar themes, watch the british film "death line" aka "raw meat" from 1973. but perhaps you deserve mediocre horror films like this because most of you gave it an A anyway. I'll go with a C because of the decent gore and 1 or 2 nice freak show abnormities.


Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:06 am
Profile ICQ
You must have big rats
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 92093
Location: Bonn, Germany
Post Re: The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
Heinrich Himmler wrote:
makeshift was right when he claimed that the black christmas remake is better than this. i can understand how someone might mistake the slick visuals and not-terrible acting for decent filmmaking, but especially the ending with the random long haired mutant dude attacking the children - the ending to a subplot that adds nothing to the story, just another 10 wasted minutes - is just lazy garbage that has no reason at all to be in this film that relies wholly on cheap jump scares. its not nearly as unpleasant as it thinks it is and also one of the most subtext-free american guilt metaphors i've ever seen - for a far superior exploration of similar themes, watch the british film "death line" aka "raw meat" from 1973. but perhaps you deserve mediocre horror films like this because most of you gave it an A anyway. I'll go with a C because of the decent gore and 1 or 2 nice freak show abnormities.


I can accept someone not liking this film, but how is the Black Christmas remake good in any shape or form?

_________________
The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!

Image


Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:34 am
Profile WWW
We had our time together
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:36 am
Posts: 13269
Location: Vienna
Post Re: The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
One of the few horror movies I really like.


Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:49 pm
Profile WWW
Cream of the Crop

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 5:17 pm
Posts: 2716
Location: Berlin, Germania
Post Re: The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
Dr. Lecter wrote:
Heinrich Himmler wrote:
makeshift was right when he claimed that the black christmas remake is better than this. i can understand how someone might mistake the slick visuals and not-terrible acting for decent filmmaking, but especially the ending with the random long haired mutant dude attacking the children - the ending to a subplot that adds nothing to the story, just another 10 wasted minutes - is just lazy garbage that has no reason at all to be in this film that relies wholly on cheap jump scares. its not nearly as unpleasant as it thinks it is and also one of the most subtext-free american guilt metaphors i've ever seen - for a far superior exploration of similar themes, watch the british film "death line" aka "raw meat" from 1973. but perhaps you deserve mediocre horror films like this because most of you gave it an A anyway. I'll go with a C because of the decent gore and 1 or 2 nice freak show abnormities.


I can accept someone not liking this film, but how is the Black Christmas remake good in any shape or form?


black christmas quotes dario argentos suspiria in a good way - nuff said.


Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:00 pm
Profile ICQ
Extraordinary
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:56 am
Posts: 12119
Location: Adrift in L.A.
Post Re:
nghtvsn wrote:
All the A's for this film will probably turn into B's or C's over time because this does Not merit an A at all..........


Nope. Six years later, it's still an A.


Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:35 pm
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 21628
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
Yeah, I can't believe how many people love it. It has one memorable scene apart from some truly terrible acting throughout.

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Sat Jun 02, 2012 11:53 pm
Profile
Wallflower
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am
Posts: 34875
Location: Minnesota
Post Re: The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
Aja did such an amazing job with this remake. It's one of the most impressive horror remakes I can think of. Very well-made. The acting is damn good, as is the fantastic score music by tomandandy (I've been a fan of theirs since their brilliant Mean Creek score). It makes me really angry what an abomination the second was. Aja should have returned for a sequel. I wish he'd come back and make a third. I know a long time ago an origin story was being thrown around based on the comic book. That could be cool.


Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:24 pm
Profile
Pure Phase
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am
Posts: 34865
Location: Maryland
Post Re: The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
Thegun wrote:
Yeah, I can't believe how many people love it. It has one memorable scene apart from some truly terrible acting throughout.

Which performances are "truly terrible"? Because as far as I can see, this is one of the better acted American horror movies of the last ten years. A very professional cast more than capable of selling their characters.

_________________
ImageImageImage

1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game


Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:28 pm
Profile
Pure Phase
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am
Posts: 34865
Location: Maryland
Post Re: The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
Magic Mike wrote:
It makes me really angry what an abomination the second was.

Indeed. It's godawful. No suspense. No memorable scenes. Awful, awful dialogue. Filled with those grating, one-note, unsympathetic military characters in its limp bid to resemble Aliens.

_________________
ImageImageImage

1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game


Last edited by David on Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:33 pm
Profile
Wallflower
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am
Posts: 34875
Location: Minnesota
Post Re: The Hills Have Eyes (2006)
David wrote:
Thegun wrote:
Yeah, I can't believe how many people love it. It has one memorable scene apart from some truly terrible acting throughout.

Which performances are "truly terrible"? Because as far as I can see, this is one of the better acted American horror movies of the last ten years. A very professional cast more than capable of selling their characters.


:thumbsup:

I found the acting very impressive.


Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:35 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 228 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.